About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBCW 6
MSNBC 5
CNN 4
CNNW 4
LANGUAGE
English 25
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)
that next paycheck may be smaller is not going over well among the troops. our pentagon correspondent barbara starr has the details. she's working the story. barbara, what's going on? >> wolf, in this town, there's nothing that causes more anxiety in budget politics than the concept of cutting the pay for the troops. but that is exactly what is on the table if congress and the president cannot reach an agreement on a spending plan. the troops usually are happy to see defense secretary leon panetta, smiles and handshakes all around. but days before he leaves office, panetta has bad news. he's proposing less money in their paycheck next year. panetta, a savvy washington operative in budget politics, is leaving it to congress to figure out how not to cut pay and keep thousands of defense employees on the job. >> we will furlough as many as 800,000 d.o.d. civilians around the country for up to 22 days. they could face a 20% cut in their salary. you don't think that's going to impact on our economy? >> but the recommendation to slow the military pay raise will put troops in the middle of t
the obama administration, i'm quoting him now, of a, quote, massive cover-up. let's bring in our pentagon correspondent barbara starr. she's working this story for us. how those are pretty stinging and strong words, barbara. >> reporter: absolutely, wolf. you know, the whole benghazi situation has already led to delays in confirming some of president obama's key appointees. chuck hagel at defense, john brennan at the cia, and now senator mccain saying he is not ready to call it a day on all of this. a congress hearing -- >> then you ought to have your facts straight. >> reporter: after congressional hearing. >> who responsible then? >> reporter: republican senator john mccain challenge, the white house on its response to benghazi. now he is going further on nbc's "meet the press." >> so there are many, many questions and we have had a massive cover-up. >> a cover-up of what? i'm just saying you, a cover-up of what? >> i'll be glad to send you a list of questions that have not been answered. >> reporter: the white house says it's given answers. conducted 20 briefings for congress. official
years, the pentagon said it can't afford to keep two aircraft carriers in the persian gulf. the u.s.s. truman would have left today from norfolk, virginia. defense secretary leon panetta blamed the cut back on is he quest ration saying if congress can't rewrite the law, things get worse. >> instead of being a first-rate power in the world, we turn into a second-rate power. that would be the result of sequester. >> you won't find this chairman arguing we need to do more with less. you'll find me arguing if that happens, we need to do less with less. >> russia will surpass u.s. defense spending in terms of overall percent of gdp in just two years. china is slated to overtake the u.s. in 2035. >> we've seen double digit increase s in chinese defense spending for more than 15 years now, and that really should not only give pause to the united states but it really should be a source of concern for the countries in the region as well. >> reporter: two years ago, then defense secretary robert gates brow beat nato allies to spent two percent of their gdp on defense. when france wanted to
them to be moved from the cia back to the pentagon. but the fact is that there has been something like a 700% increase in the use of drones under president obama as compared to george w. bush. >> and andrea, as you know, from your sources at the agency and i know from my sources not only from the agency but in the entire intelligence community when barack obama came into office, they specifically said, they wanted to ramp up drone operations. and they wanted there to be a side-by-side comparison of how many strikes bush did versus how many strikes they did. for brennan to say that he wants to pull back on drone strikes, that's just -- that's just not accurate. and that's not what's been happening since january 20th, 2009. you can go back. and when the history is written, you will go back to january 20th, 2009, and see a very deliberate -- >> executive orders. >> executive orders. and again, i think most americans probably support this policy. so it's not like i'm talking about anything that's going to be scandalous. most people will support the president doing this. but it obviously ca
thing is, running the pentagon is a hard job. people failed at it before. the largest bureaucracy we have in the government, one of the largest workforces in the world. i mean, it's a hugely complicated thing to do administratively, logistically, politically. strong centers of power in that building, right? i have no idea whether chuck hagel is up to it, nor does anyone. none of that has been lit gaited at all. he talked to al jazeera once, gave speeches to. the actual job the guy is going to do, i don't know if i have a dog in the fight. do i care if chuck hagel is running the pentagon? as far as i can tell, no one has done much in congress to sort of sort that out. >> and the one thing that job, is a policymaker. that is not the person who decides whether we go to war but takes the orders from the white house about how to implement it. that is not the person who decides what our relationship is with any other foreign country. those issues belong in other jobs. that's what they made the whole hearing about. >> no, absolutely. and even their fixation on benghazi is located in state.
're going to cut pretty significantly from the pentagon's budget. your move, mr. president. >> he wants revenues to go up again and john boehner's response is, we just did that. >> that's the thing. we always heard, you guys raise taxes, cut defense spending and then we will come back with a compromise on spending cuts. but, no, we raise taxes, we come forward with pentagon cuts and the president comes back with, we want to tax more americans. let's raise taxes again. >> you wonder where this ends now then, right, because if the president's not going to go anywhere without more revenue, where does this take us? we have the plan in place that was supposed to do both of those things. we're at that point on friday and we will hit it and neither side is going to get to it. what's the end game here. >> how do you think this is goin going? >> it's going terribly. >> republicans always lose these budget battles. i get a sense for the first time the president is overplaying his hand. talking about fear and loathing, locusts ascending from the heavens, now talking about more tax cuts, your dog w
will penalize our pentagon. and the round of golf played one day after our commander-in-chief found time in his busy schedule to hit the links with none other than serial philanderer tiger woods. and the first lady is taking advantage of the tax dollars, on a ski trip in colorado. as far as the outing with president obama and the world famous golfer don't expect to see any video, the white house prohibited from covering the anointed one's activities this weekend. the following statement released by ed henry from the white house correspondent's association. reporters have expressed extreme frustration to me having no access to the president of the united states' entire weekend. there's a very simple, but important principle we will continue to fight for today and in the days ahead. transparency. wait a minute, i think i remember a guy talking about the importance of transparency. right, it's bara obama. >> let me say it as simply as i can, transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency. our commitment to all business means more than simply informing the american peo
there starts to end. the headline news out of brussels today was a very terse statement from the pentagon spokesman. it was kind of strange. he was essentially clarifying, hey, whatever you heard from the germans earlier today, that was not true. this is the statement. the reports that the u.s. told allies that we are considering 8,000 to 12,000 u.s. troops after 2014 are not correct. a range of 8,000 to 12,000 troops was discussed, but it was discussed as the possible size of the overall nato mission, not the u.s. contribution. ah, important clarification. so the defense minister from germany had apparently told reporters that 8 to 12,000 troops was how many troops america was going to keep in afghanistan. everybody thought that was very big news since that's not what we heard hear at home at all. maybe that is how the german guy understood it, but it is apparently not the way that leon panetta meant it. that was the headline out of brussels today. those troops, that's nato combined, that's not just us. that was the headline. the other news of course was that representing the united stat
to take a closer look at how that hostage situation was resolved. let's bring in our pentagon correspondent, chris lawrence. he's joining us on the very sophisticated operation that freed that little boy and what similar operations could look like in years ahead. chris, what are you seeing? >> reporter: yeah, wolf. we're now learning that the fbi used drones likely provided from the u.s. military to keep around the clock surveillance on that particular bunker. that coming from former fbi official tom fuentes who has been talking to his sources. the future and what the fbi may be able to do down the line goes way beyond what was done here. >> reporter: a little boy barricaded in a bunker with a killer. as the crisis stretched into a seventh day, an fbi hostage rescue team practiced how to save him. law enforcement sources now say the fbi built a mockup of the bunker and trained on how they'd go in. but how would they know what was happening below? a law enforcement source tells cnn authorities managed to slip a camera into the hideout. >> we're going to try to introduce microph
as the secretary steps up the rhetoric about dire cuts at the pentagon if sequestration goes into effect march 1. >>> the man accused of trying to blow up the federal reserve in new york expected to plead guilty to terror charges. officials say he tried to blow up the van with 1,000 pounds of explosives outside the buildings, but the explosives were fake. he is charged with trying to use weapons of mass destruction and trying to thwart al qaeda. >> there are thousands of reasons why people are late to work. traffic? the most common culprit. but not all employees blame jammed roads. a new survey reveals some of the most memorable excuses like -- good ideas for you. my car wouldn't start because the breathalyzer showed i was intoxicated. my car was attacked by a bear. here's the photo of proof. are we going to see it? >>steve: we heard it. >>gretchen: last but not least, my angry wife froze my keys in a glass of water in the freezer. come on. out of those three, that is the most logical one. >>brian: really? i tell you what, i think there is a long line of misdeeds if she is going to that extent t
in the action, so to speak. but the pentagon has to deal with congress, with republican lawmakers and won't this affect their relationship? >> of course not. this is always transaction. as it happens for the last 70 or 100 years. whatever of the things, hagel was a senator, he understands how the place works how he's got three people that can help him because the president doesn't like dealing with the senate very much. who can blame him now he's got joe biden, john kerry and chuck hagel all skilled with dealing with the senate and that will be helpful for him moving through. >> you know, carol, this is one of the reasons why it's so problematic for republicans. and rich is right that there have been some holds and some there be something like this in the past. but we're in a very different place right now. and the reasons that they are stating as to why they are against chuck hagel do not pass muster. >> right. >> the american people are sick of petty politics in washington. this is a president, he has said he's willing to meet the republicans halfway. we have yet to see the halfway that
see it as an opportunity to slim down the pentagon while republicans are applauding real efforts to shrink the government. however, the white house continues to paint a dire picture. attorney general eric holder says the across the board cuts will make the nation -- listen to me -- less safe. >> oh my lord. >> the justice department is going to lose 9% of its budget between now and september 30th. we'll lose $1.6 billion. there are not going to be as many fbi agents, atf agents, dea agents, prosecutors able to do their jobs as we would like them to do. this is something that will have an impact on the safety of this country and anybody who says that's not true is either lying or saying something that runs contrary to the facts. >> cramer, real quick? >> the sequester is a real bad word. sequester because 99% of american people don't understand it. i hate to use the word on "mad money." i hate it. sequester. >> don't use it. >> you can't. >> birthday cake. we can rename it birthday cake. >> fiscal cliff worked. it had great imagery. >> did you see the story on the front page of "t
the sequester in a hurry, then yes, it's a real problem because it doesn't let the pentagon begin to plan and distribute, if you will, the cuts. but at the end of the day, whether it's defense spending, education spending, health spending, what always matters more than how much you spend is how you spend it. and so i'm not, at the end of the day, all that worried about how much we spend, whether it's on defense or anything else. you just want to have the time to make some intelligent cuts rather than have to make them literally in a matter of days which would probably mean that readiness more than anything else would be cut out of the defense department account. and that's probably the one thing you don't want cut out of it. >> sam stein, you're close and yet so far away over there at the jump seat. what are the odds that the sequester actually takes place? we know the president's proposed something to push them back a while. are we going to see these kind of cuts, the ones that were outlined in the sequester proposal? >> i think the odds are pretty high, to be honest. i don't think there
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)